SharkD wrote:
> On 6/11/2010 2:03 AM, Darren New wrote:
>> That said, my understanding is that you can trademark a font name, and
>> you can copyright the file the font is in, but you can't copyright the
>> font itself. (I.e., a font is an "idea" while a TTF file is an
>> expression of that idea.)
> 
> Why would their copyright be different than any other artistic work?
> 

Dealing with USA law. Still not a lawyer, not legal advice, etc etc.

It isn't different, but there are only certain things that can be
copyrighted. The wording, prior to 1995, (§202.10(c), 37 C.F.R.):

“(c) If the sole intrinsic function of an article is its utility, the
fact that the article is unique and attractively shaped will not qualify
it as a work of art. However, if the shape of a utilitarian article
incorporates features, such as artistic sculpture, carving, or pictorial
representation, which can be identified separately and are capable of
existing independently as a work of art, such features will be eligible
for registration.”

That got changed in '95, you can read the current statute here
http://www.bitlaw.com/source/37cfr/202_10.html

The main problem with guessing how that change affects fonts is that a
major case hasn't been heard since the change took effect. Peter Pan
Fabrics, Inc. v. Martin Weiner Corp. was in the 60s, and the major case
Eltra Corp. v. Ringer was in the 70s. Eltra found that fonts did not
meet the requirement for 'artistic merit' and I think has been the
standing precedent.

Now, internationally copyrighted fonts are protected in the USA. Berne
Convention and all that.

Post a reply to this message